If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Pax Americana, Technological Readiness and broken weapons systems

Or "How we self-sabotage our starting positions for the next conflict, through unacceptable QC and wasteful Defense Spending"

A $2.7 billion attack submarine, the USS Minnesota, has been out of commission for more than a year because of a defective pipe joint near the ship’s nuclear-powered engine.

The defective part, which is worth about $10,000, was installed near the ship’s nuclear power plant. Engineers discovered the poorly welded steam pipe in early 2015, and ongoing repairs have led to the ship being stuck in overhaul ever since, according to Navy Times.

Good comparison-and-contrast on what sort of value we're getting for our defense dollar.

America's new Zumwalt-class DDG-1000 destroyer is a marvel of engineering.

Sixty percent bigger than the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers it was designed to replace, but just as fast as a DDG-51 and featuring a stealthier design, Zumwalt touts two 155-millimeter guns, can carry a combination of 80 Tomahawk, Sea Sparrow, and ASROC missiles, and is one of the few warships in the U.S. fleet capable of producing enough power to operate the new railgun and laser cannon weaponry just starting to come on line.

But Zumwalt is not cheap.

Although it was initially designed in 1998 with the intention of producing 32 warships for a total cost of $36.9 billion (including R&D costs), a combination of cost overruns and procurement cuts have sent per-ship costs skyrocketing. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, each of the Zumwalt-class ships now under construction, expected to cost $1.2 billion to build, will instead cost $7.5 billion.

That's more than half the cost of a Ford-class aircraft carrier, and a big price to swallow and get only a destroyer in return. So it's little wonder that, with costs spiraling out of control, the Pentagon pulled the plug on the Zumwalt program in 2009, ordering a halt to production after just three ships.

But now there's a new threat on the horizon that could convince the Navy it can't afford not to build more Zumwalts.

lightweight is fashionable but ...

The term lightweight is a catalyst for all manner of projects intended to benefit military operations, for example the Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System (CLAWS) and the Lightweight Dismounted Automatic Machine Gun (LDAM).

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...r-machine-gun/
recently highlighted a project – not apparently CLAWS but possibly LDAM - to develop a replacement .50cal MG for the classic .50cal M2 HB and as improved with QCB. Just possibly that project might be intended to also replace the derivative M3 with its higher maximum ROF.

The item’s reporter was unimpressed for several reasons not explained with all details on weights, although he did quote it is hoped to “save 16-pounds off of a 26-pound barrel”. As a summary of some of his concerns, the M2 which covers only part of the overall requirement for support MGs is bulky and with heavyweight tripod weights 128 lb, reducing to 106 lb with lightweight tripod. Keeping the M2 supplied with ammunition is burdensome – at about 28 lb for a 100-round belt without packaging - so it is often employed as a vehicle weapon. And when offloaded or back-packed by infantry it routinely needs logistic support from vehicles.

With the M2 in service as a reliable, well regarded and widely employed MG there is little point in spending development dollars on a new .50cal medium ROF MG or even just a lightweight barrel. A heavier barrel with less need for changing out on vehicles could be better value.

That is intended to increase their maximum reach of about 30,000 yd to about 50,000 yd. And it includes a 52 calibre barrel that will increase the 9,300 lb weight of the towed M777 howitzer by some 1,000 lb. The M777 was quite recently developed with a part titanium carriage to obtain lightweight heli-portable support fire. The concepts for deep battle may in addition to rocket and missile artillery and attack helicopters demand long range barrels on self-propelled howitzers. However, heavying up any of the M777s for intermittent and punishing high pressure use seems illogical.

The US Army must already have procedures to ensure redundant and nugatory projects are shut out or down at an early gate. But the gate guardians could be trapped in a procedural bog or have in some other way gone missing. If either of those circumstances apply it could be appropriate to start and promptly implement a higher level weight reduction project.

Damage done by laser weapons is a function of power and time. The longer a laser can stay on a target, like a drone or an incoming missile, the more damage it can do. The more powerful that laser is, the less time it needs to spend burning its target. The U.S. Navy already has a 30-kilowatt laser mounted on a ship. Yesterday, at a summit on directed energy weapons in Washington, D.C., the Navy announced it plans to go bigger: 150 kilowatts.

National Defense Magazine writes:
The Office of Naval Research “will perform a shipboard test of a 150-killowatt laser weapon system in the near future,” said [vice chief of naval operations] Adm. Bill Moran during a speech at Booz Allen Hamilton’s Directed Energy Summit, which was held in Washington, D.C.

Were it not for efforts by the U.S. military to develop a lightweight, unarmored, all-terrain vehicle for the battlefield there might not be a market for SUVs today. It all began 75 years ago last December when the United States military adopted the 'jeep', and while the iconic military vehicle was phased out and replaced by the Humvee – the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) in the early 1980s – the Army could go full circle and bring back the jeep.

Last year the Army began gearing up its Ground Mobility Vehicle Program for fiscal 2017. It was part of the Army's Combat Vehicle Modernization Strategy that sought to procure lightweight combat vehicles for infantry brigade combat teams. The vehicles considered sound very much like what first entered service back in 1940.

The U.S. Air Force asked industry on Friday for proposals to replace the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and the nuclear cruise missile as the military moves ahead with a costly modernization of its aging atomic weapons systems.

The Air Force said in a statement it expected to award up to two contracts for a new ICBM weapons system, or ground-based strategic deterrent, sometime next summer or fall. It also expected to award up to two contracts in the same time frame for a new nuclear cruise missile, or long-range standoff weapon.

This is probably one of the underlying math problems that threatens U.S. military superiority. The rate of increase in cost (resulting in a reduction in the number of available physical assets) exceeds the rate of increase in capabilities. Therefore, even as the U.S. spends more money, it receives a declining amount of combat power per dollar. Related to this problem, the long development & implementation timelines for new generations of aircraft, submarines, etc exceeds the analytical capability to assess their utility by the time they enter service. The average in fighter aircraft development time was about one year in 1945 to over 20 years today. What is the security environment going to be like in 2037? Nobody knows. Ask an analyst in 1913 what the world would be like in 1933. We don't have the institutional flexibility to respond to paradigm shifts in security.

Last edited by AmericanPride; 03-30-2017 at 04:19 PM.

When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

Yet despite the remarkable success of the U.S. innovation economy, many players in both government and industry have been pulling back from the types of bold long-term investments in fundamental science that could seed the great companies of the future. The entire innovation ecosystem is becoming more shortsighted and cautious. And by failing to invest sufficiently in basic research today, Washington risks creating an innovation deficit that may hobble the U.S. economy for decades to come. This concern has become acute since the White House released its budget blueprint, which proposes crippling cuts to science funding.

When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

Top generals have been insisting for years that if North Korea launched a missile at the United States, the U.S military would be able to shoot it down.
But that is a highly questionable assertion, according to independent scientists and government investigators.
In making it, the generals fail to acknowledge huge questions about the effectiveness of the $40 billion missile defense system they rely on to stop a potential nuclear-armed ballistic missile fired by North Korean or Iran, according to a series of outside reviews.

Fighter jets with laser weapons set to take to the skies in 2021 as Lockheed Martin wins $26 million 'Lance' high-energy laser contract

'LANCE' contract will build on technology from the Athena and Aladin lasers $26.3m contract aims to design, develop, and produce system for fighter jets. An airborne platform is smaller, presenting more of a challenge, experts say

AAR for the F-35A - reduced but salvageable

There is potentially yet another problem with the F-35A CTOL variant of the JSF. For Air-Air Refuelling the F-35A has on its fuselage spine a standard US Air Force-style AAR receptacle designed to interface with the heavy flying boom of an aerial tanker. By contrast the maritime F-35B STOVL and F-35C CATOBAR variants for the US Marine Corps and US Navy are equipped with a retractable AAR elbow-probe designed to interface with a less heavy long hose-drogue towed by a tanker, or by a buddy fighter temporarily configured as an expedient tanker.

The refuelling boom carried by specialised tankers is subject to damage and malfunction due to slapping and ramming, and it can also damage the AAR receptacle on a receiving aircraft. However those large tankers typically have a boom and two underwing hose-drogue pods .On that basis and the redundancy factor implicit in twin hoses it is apparent that many receiver aircraft would be better secured and more employable if dual equipped with an AAR receptacle and an AAR probe.

There have been no reports of a version of the F-35A being either dual equipped or singly equipped with just an AAR probe. So those European and other forces which have traditionally employed buddy fighters and specialised hose-drogue - or boom and hose-drogue - tankers may be doing so knowing that acquisition of the F-35A CTOL will leave them with loose ends.